• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Young Catholics urge Vatican to issue inclusive LGBT message

EMNofSeattle said:
I am a Roman Catholic, an adult convert.

I don’t get to decide what the church hierarchy ends up doing, but if they do something I can’t get over then my membership is voluntary


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
you didnt answer all my questions . . .
so roman Catholics have made no changes over the years? stereotypical the follow the exact words of the bible and god?

and again (since im sure they have made changes, all religions have) why is THIS something you cant get over but obviously other things you could?
 
EMNofSeattle said:
I doubt these “young Catholics” are really that involved or will remain so if the Church changes moral teaching.

Look at what happened to the Episcopal Church in the US after going full on pro-gay. I will leave the church and join an evangelical congregation if they start sanctioning homosexuality. And so will the people who actually believe in God
Click to expand...

If you change that to "And so will the people who actually believe in the same version of what someone else told them God Wants as I do." I will agree with you.
 
AGENT J said:
Clearly you are not and you keep proving it. if you were you wouldnt keep saying gay pedophilia because theres no such thing that i am aware of.
Pedophilia is an attraction to prepubescent children PERIOD. Typically a pedophile abuses their victims based on access and gender doesnt matter . . .sometimes they do have a preferences but its still just pedophilia.
You would have to know what the paedophiles sexual orientation is in his sex life OUTSIDE of pedophilia to know what you are claiming. A male abusing a male child is NOT equal to homosexual orientation nor is a male abusing a female child equal to heterosexuality. SO NO you havent given any examples yet. Like i said im sure they exists but i havent seen any i recall.
Click to expand...
Is it your contention a person can not be both homosexual and a pedophile? just to be clear?
 
EMNofSeattle said:
Good for them, that’s their personal thing and I have nothing against them. That has no bearing on whether the Catholic Church should continue following moral guidelines set forward in their own founding documents!

I’m guessing these conservative atheists aren’t attending episcopal churches since they are now a gay atheism advocacy group.

So why does the existence of these people mean a church has to sell their souls (literally and figuratively) to accommodate people who don’t care either way?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Can we put your vote down as being in favour of Option 2 "Cut Bait" (i.e. "any sexual activity outside of a marriage between a man and a woman is grounds for immediate expulsion from the RCC because God Condemns It Absolutely And Irrevocably")?
 
TU Curmudgeon said:
Probably a lot fewer than the number of heterosexual pedophiles.
Click to expand...

No argument with that, other than I would think the per capita would be higher within the RCC as compared to the populace at large.
 
EMNofSeattle said:
Except it’s not, some of the mainline Protestant branches tried endorsing same sex behavior and they’re in terminal decline, the actual decline in mass attendance is minimal and evangelical unaffiliated churches have not seen declines at all.

The episcopal church in particular is openly teaching beliefs considered heresy

https://www.beliefnet.com/faiths/ho...why-is-the-episcopal-church-near-collapse?p=2



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Somehow "Beliefnet was acquired by the Fox Entertainment Group." doesn't give me a great deal of confidence in what comes from it.
 
Logician Man said:
Is it your contention a person can not be both homosexual and a pedophile? just to be clear?
Click to expand...

What?!?! LMAO of course not how did you even come up with something so illogical as nothing in my post suggest that in anyway. Are you actually reading them? once again thank you for proving you are severely uneducated on this topic? Just stop already the fact is your post failed and you havent provided any basis to support it.
 
AGENT J said:
What?!?! LMAO of course not how did you even come up with something so illogical as nothing in my post suggest that in anyway. Are you actually reading them? once again thank you for proving you are severely uneducated on this topic? Just stop already the fact is your post failed and you havent provided any basis to support it.
Click to expand...

I will own up that my first post in this thread could have been much clearer and better worded.
 
Logician Man said:
I will own up that my first post in this thread could have been much clearer and better worded.
Click to expand...

good job thats a start (so was post 21 and 29) .. but lets see if you understand/learned why though. Why is it unclear and the wording inaccurate?
 
I don't do the inquisition thing J-Man. You're not THAT big of a deal. :)
 
Logician Man said:
I don't do the inquisition thing J-Man. You're not THAT big of a deal. :)
Click to expand...

Translation: you probably dont actually know why but i accept your concession. At least you admitted your statement was wrong.
 
TU Curmudgeon said:
Somehow "Beliefnet was acquired by the Fox Entertainment Group." doesn't give me a great deal of confidence in what comes from it.
Click to expand...

Not an argument


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
TU Curmudgeon said:
Can we put your vote down as being in favour of Option 2 "Cut Bait" (i.e. "any sexual activity outside of a marriage between a man and a woman is grounds for immediate expulsion from the RCC because God Condemns It Absolutely And Irrevocably")?
Click to expand...

Expelled? As in what? Excommunicated? Physically expelled from the building? What are you talking about?

Sexual activity outside of heterosexual marriage is sin, that is long established church teaching.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
AGENT J said:
Yes its EXTREMELY high! claiming otherwise wise is grossly dishonest and exposes your biased.
You dont get to included its "followers" (which i am one) to magically claim the numbers are low . . .

that would be like saying the bengals dont havent had a lot of criminals on in their organization and including its fans LMAO . . .just stop.

the fact is among the hierarchy, priests etc the number is extremely high
Click to expand...

What is extremely high? Maybe you should quantify that in real terms.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Tigerace117 said:
Gee, and why do you think they are in “terminal decline”?

I’ll give a hint—- it’s not because they “endorsed” something which wasn’t a choice to begin with.

It’s because the world has changed.

And the only way to increase said decline even more—- especially among the younger generations—- is to double down on mindless hatred.
Click to expand...

No, because among younger generations those who identify as religious are more religiously active then older generations who identify as religious. And those people will not go to a liberal church that ordains crossdressers and teaches the Bible doesn’t say what it clearly says. And the share of people who identify as religious will not darken the doorstep of a church period.

So the people who were Christian in name only now have no problem outright saying they’re not religious, and those who identify as such are true believers. So mainlines trying to cut the middle path have imploded. There’s no market share for them


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
EMNofSeattle said:
What is extremely high? Maybe you should quantify that in real terms.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

sure compare it too something like the employee/management hierarchy of staples, lowes, home depot, schools, ymca's, sams club etc

lets just look at PA where i live and the recent scandal . . .it was like 300+ and 1000+ "CREDIBLE" cases . . . . . . . .thats high in the organisation where you tried to claim its not . . theres no logic that supports your claim . .

also you never answered MY questions
you didnt answer all my questions . . .
are you claiming roman Catholics have made no changes over the years? stereotypical they follow the exact words of the bible and god?

and again (since im sure they have made changes, all religions have) why is THIS (sexual orientation issues) something you cant get over but obviously other things you could?
 
EMNofSeattle said:
No, because among younger generations those who identify as religious are more religiously active then older generations who identify as religious. And those people will not go to a liberal church that ordains crossdressers and teaches the Bible doesn’t say what it clearly says. And the share of people who identify as religious will not darken the doorstep of a church period.

So the people who were Christian in name only now have no problem outright saying they’re not religious, and those who identify as such are true believers. So mainlines trying to cut the middle path have imploded. There’s no market share for them


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Cross dressers? LMAO your bigotry is showing. Who brought up cross dressers?

also FYI you nor me or anybody on this planet has the power to judge if anybody else is christian :shrug:
 
AGENT J said:
sure compare it too something like the employee/management hierarchy of staples, lowes, home depot, schools, ymca's, sams club etc

lets just look at PA where i live and the recent scandal . . .it was like 300+ and 1000+ "CREDIBLE" cases . . . . . . . .thats high in the organisation where you tried to claim its not . . theres no logic that supports your claim . .

also you never answered MY questions
you didnt answer all my questions . . .
are you claiming roman Catholics have made no changes over the years? stereotypical they follow the exact words of the bible and god?

and again (since im sure they have made changes, all religions have) why is THIS (sexual orientation issues) something you cant get over but obviously other things you could?
Click to expand...

I’m not aware of any changes made by the Catholic Church to directly contradict moral teachings in scripture “changes” in non scriptural doctrine are 100% irrelevant. It is not a “sexual orientation issue” it’s an issue of sanctioning behavior that is explicitly condemned in no uncertain terms in scripture. Holding mass in Latin versus English is not an issue with commandment in scripture.

Again, one study showed public school teachers commit sexual abuse at a rate 100 times greater then clergy
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/has-media-ignored-sex-abuse-in-school/
300-1000 is not extremely high when you realize it was considering all cases whether probable or not, over decades of time with the most recent ones being over 15 years ago. The church didn’t properly handle these cases, but for most of the timeframe these allegations came out in, no one did. And the public teachers unions still will not allow schools to




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
AGENT J said:
Cross dressers? LMAO your bigotry is showing. Who brought up cross dressers?
Click to expand...

I cited an earlier article involving the episcopal church you probably didn’t read. The post I was responding to claimed churches need to change to be more liberal, that’s clearly not the case

also FYI you nor me or anybody on this planet has the power to judge if anybody else is christian :shrug:
Click to expand...
Where in the Bible does it say that? No where are you forbidden from calling out those who practice heresy. You clearly didn’t get a quality religious education

If a church teaches or places in leadership ministers who directly contradict the words of scripture that is something you are absolutely permitted to call out.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
EMNofSeattle said:
1.)I’m not aware of any changes made by the Catholic Church to directly contradict moral teachings in scripture “changes” in non scriptural doctrine are 100% irrelevant. It is not a “sexual orientation issue” it’s an issue of sanctioning behavior that is explicitly condemned in no uncertain terms in scripture. Holding mass in Latin versus English is not an issue with commandment in scripture.

2.)Again, one study showed public school teachers commit sexual abuse at a rate 100 times greater then clergy
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/has-media-ignored-sex-abuse-in-school/
300-1000 is not extremely high when you realize it was considering all cases whether probable or not, over decades of time with the most recent ones being over 15 years ago. The church didn’t properly handle these cases, but for most of the timeframe these allegations came out in, no one did. And the public teachers unions still will not allow schools to




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

1.) thank you for proving my point . . . its only what people FEEL is magically ok and not ok LMAO
2.) did you just quote a article from 2006 about one heinous crime to justify another heinous crime and try to call it not high

300+ is extremely high and disgusting and again you trying to claim otherwise is dishonest and speaks of your biased. You claimed its not high you were and still are wrong. good grief your defense is pathetic, troubling and part of the problem. . . .
 
EMNofSeattle said:
1.)I cited an earlier article involving the episcopal church you probably didn’t read. The post I was responding to claimed churches need to change to be more liberal, that’s clearly not the case
2.)Where in the Bible does it say that? No where are you forbidden from calling out those who practice heresy. You clearly didn’t get a quality religious education
3.)If a church teaches or places in leadership ministers who directly contradict the words of scripture that is something you are absolutely permitted to call out.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

1.) that doesnt answer my question nor does it change your displayed bigotry.
2.) please dont post retarded dishonest strawmen I will simply point them out, mock them and destroy them for how fatally wrong they are and make your posts look stupid.
i didnt mention anybody "calling others out". You are free to have whatever meaningless opinions you want. I specifically said that none of us have the power to judge if another is a Christian or not. Only god can and thats a fact based on religion teachings. Holy SWEET irony talk about not a good a quality in religion LMAO:lamo
. . are you telling me that there is any man on this planet who gets to judge another and determine if they are Christian or not and that judgment is final? the answer is off course not, god gets the final and only concrete say and THATS what I said and nothing you can post will change that fact.
3.) See #2 that retarded dishonest strawman already failed.
 
AGENT J said:
1.) that doesnt answer my question nor does it change your displayed bigotry.
Click to expand...
you are being dishonest and using the word “bigotry” is not an argument. In fact you are displaying bigotry towards me right now, so that cancels out.
2.) please dont post retarded dishonest strawmen I will simply point them out, mock them and destroy them for how fatally wrong they are and make your posts look stupid.
Click to expand...
none of this is an argument.
i didnt mention anybody "calling others out".
Click to expand...
not in those words, but you used that very argument.
You are free to have whatever meaningless opinions you want
Click to expand...
not an argument
. I specifically said that none of us have the power to judge if another is a Christian
Click to expand...
yes you can judge someone not to be a Christian based on their words or actions contrary to scripture, in fact both Jesus and St Paul specifically caution believers to look for those who are not Christian but claim to be. We are also commanded to rebuke those who sin. Your philosophy is contrary to the scriptures.
or not. Only god can and thats a fact based on religion teachings.
Click to expand...
no, not the case. God certainly will judge those who are heretics, but when a church is teaching false beliefs directly at odds with the scriptures then there is no prohibition against calling them out. Nowhere is that in the Bible. In fact it teaches exactly the opposite, see Galatians chapter 1.
Holy SWEET irony talk about not a good a quality in religion LMAO:lamo
Click to expand...
again, no argument presented
. . are you telling me that there is any man on this planet who gets to judge another and determine if they are Christian or not and that judgment is final?
Click to expand...
yes, if someone professes to be a Christian but their stated beliefs are in direct contradiction to the scriptures then you may dismiss them as false teachers, this is biblical. Obviously if they repent then you may now regard them as brothers or sisters in Christ.
the answer is off course not,
Click to expand...
That is not correct. See Titus 3:10, Galatians 1:8)
god gets the final and only concrete say
Click to expand...
god gets to reject such people damning them to hell, however you can judge someone to be not in compliance with his law. If you see someone driving a car while drunk you may call him a drunk driver even though only a judge can sentence him to jail time.
and THATS what I said and nothing you can post will change that fact.
3.) See #2 that retarded dishonest strawman already failed.
Click to expand...
You keep saying things that are not correct



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
AGENT J said:
1.) thank you for proving my point . . . its only what people FEEL is magically ok and not ok LMAO
2.) did you just quote a article from 2006 about one heinous crime to justify another heinous crime and try to call it not high

300+ is extremely high and disgusting and again you trying to claim otherwise is dishonest and speaks of your biased. You claimed its not high you were and still are wrong. good grief your defense is pathetic, troubling and part of the problem. . . .
Click to expand...

It has nothing to do with feelings. It is objective, bible says behavior x is sin, then santioning and not expecting repentance for said behavior is contrary to doctrine That’s not a feelings based argument at all.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom